It's good to understand how other people might feel, but don’t assume you know their needs. 1 in 3 show unconscious bias towards people who have a disability. Include a diverse group of people and be collaborative when designing services.
2. Accessible design is good design
Good design meets needs and solves problems. If you design something which is inaccessible you create barriers. Good design is not just what looks good, it must work for everyone regardless of what tools they use or what impairments they have.
3. Start with what works
Start simple and only add complexity if it is needed. Use what is already available and re-use what others have already proven to work. The more things you design from scratch, the more work you need to do to make sure they're accessible.
4. If it's not accessible, it's not done
Do not consider something finished until you are sure it is accessible. Accessibility is not a choice, it is law. It is always a priority, and if you neglect it you will create more work for yourself later.
5. This is still for everyone*
Everything we design should be as inclusive, readable and usable as possible. We are still building for the needs of everyone. We provide services for some of the most vulnerable people in society, not just people who are using the web.
That’s all 5. Feel free to use these or have an input. I’m always open to feedback and collaboration
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I've recently been collecting accessibility audits to try and understand what makes a good one, what makes a bad one, and if there is any work we can do to try and standardise them a bit, at least across Government. Here is a thread of my findings.
The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) outlines that an audit should include 8 things:
1: Executive Summary
2: Background
3: Scope
4: Reviewer(s)
5: Review process
6: Results and recommendations
7: References
8: Appendices w3.org/WAI/test-evalu…
I got sent a whole bunch of audits, so a big thank you to everyone that got involved! A lot of them were conducted by the same organisations so looked at 10 audits by 7 organisations. The additional 3 are significant iterations to the format or process by 2 of the organisations.